Council of Pisa

Preliminaries.

The great Schism of the West had
lasted thirty years (since 1378), and none of the means employed
to bring it to an end had been successful. Compromise or arbitral
agreement between the two parties had never been seriously
attempted; surrender had failed lamentably owing to the obstinacy
of the rival popes, all equally convinced of their rights; action,
that is the interference of princes and armies, had been without
result. During these deplorable divisions Boniface IX, Innocent
VII, and Gregory XII had in turn replaced Urban VI (Bartholomew
Prignano) in the See of Rome, while Benedict XIII had succeeded
Clement VII (Robert of Geneva) in that of Avignon.

The cardinals of the reigning
pontiffs being greatly dissatisfied, both with the pusillanimity
and nepotism of Gregory XII and the obstinacy and bad will of
Benedict XIII, resolved to make use of a more efficacious means,
namely a general council. The French king, Charles V, had
recommended this, at the beginning of the schism, to the cardinals
assembled at Anagni and Fondi in revolt against Urban VI, and on
his deathbed he had expressed the same wish (1380). It had been
upheld by several councils, by the cities of Ghent and Florence,
by the Universities of Oxford and Paris, and by the most renowned
doctors of the time, for example: Henry of Langenstein ("Epistola
pacis", 1379, "Epistola concilii pacis", 1381);
Conrad of Gelnhausen ("Epistola Concordiæ", 1380);
Gerson (Sermo coram Anglicis); and especially the latter's master,
Pierre d'Ailly, the eminent Bishop of Cambrai, who wrote of
himself: "A principio schismatis materiam concilii generalis
primus … instanter prosequi non timui" (Apologia
Concilii Pisani, apud Tschackert). Encouraged by such men, by the
known dispositions of King Charles VI and of the University of
Paris, four members of the Sacred College of Avignon went to
Leghorn where they arranged an interview with those of Rome, and
where they were soon joined by others. The two bodies thus united
were resolved to seek the union of the Church in spite of
everything, and thenceforth to adhere to neither of the
competitors. On 2 and 5 July, 1408, they addressed to the princes
and prelates an encyclical letter summoning them to a general
council at Pisa on 25 March, 1409. To oppose this project Benedict
convoked a council at Perpignan while Gregory assembled another at
Aquilea, but those assemblies met with little success, hence to
the Council of Pisa were directed all the attention, unrest, and
hopes of the Catholic world. The Universities of Paris, Oxford,
and Cologne, many prelates, and the most distinguished doctors,
like d'Ailly and Gerson, openly approved the action of the
revolted cardinals. The princes on the other hand were divided,
but most of them no longer relied on the good will of the rival
popes and were determined to act without them, despite them, and,
if needs were, against them.

Meeting of the Council

On the feast of the Annunciation, 4
patriarchs, 22 cardinals, and 80 bishops asembled in the cathedral
of Pisa under the presidency of Cardinal de Malesset, Bishop of
Palestrina. Among the clergy were the representatives of 100
absent bishops, 87 abbots with the proxies of those who could not
come to Pisa, 41 priors and generals of religious orders, 300
doctors of theology or canon law. The ambassadors of all the
Christian kingdoms completed this august assembly. Judicial
procedure began at once. Two cardinal deacons, two bishops, and
two notaries gravely approached the church doors, opened them, and
in a loud voice, in the Latin tongue, called upon the rival
pontiffs to appear. No one replied. "Has anyone been
appointed to represent them?" they added. Again there was
silence. The delegates returned to their places and requested that
Gregory and Benedict be declared guilty of contumacy. On three
consecutive days this ceremony was repeated without success, and
throughout the month of May testimonies were heard against the
claimants, but the formal declaration of contumacy did not take
place until the fourth session. In defence of Gregory, a German
embassy unfavourable to the project of the assembled cardinals
went to Pisa (15 April) at the instance of Robert of Bavaria, King
of the Romans. John, Archbishop of Riga, brought before the
council several excellent objections, but in general the German
delegates spoke so blunderingly that they aroused hostile
manifestations and were compelled to leave the city as fugitives.
The line of conduct adopted by Carlo Malatesta, Prince of Rimini,
was more clever. Robert by his awkward friendliness injured
Gregory's otherwise most defendable cause; but Malatesta defended
it as a man of letters, an orator, a politician, and a knight,
though he did not attain the desired success. Benedict refused to
attend the council in person, but his delegates arrived very late
(14 June), and their claims aroused the protests and laughter of
the assembly. The people of Pisa overwhelmed them with threats and
insults. The Chancellor of Aragon was listened to with little
favour, while the Archbishop of Tarragona made a declaration of
war more daring than wise. Intimidated by rough demonstrations,
the ambassadors, among them Boniface Ferrer, Prior of the Grande
Chartreuse, secretly left the city and returned to their master.

The pretended preponderance of the
French delegates has been often attacked, but the French element
did not prevail either in numbers, influence, or boldness of
ideas. The most remarkable characteristic of the assembly was the
unanimity which reigned among the 500 members during the month of
June, especially noticeable at the fifteenth general session (5
June, 1409). When the usual formality was completed with the
request for a definite condemnation of Peter de Luna and Angelo
Corrario, the Fathers of Pisa returned a sentence until then
unexampled in the history of the Church. All were stirred when the
Patriarch of Alexandria, Simon de Cramaud, addressed the august
meeting: "Benedict XIII and Gregory XII", said he, "are
recognised as schismatics, the approvers and makers of schism,
notorious heretics, guilty of perjury and violation of solemn
promises, and openly scandalising the universal Church. In
consequence, they are declared unworthy of the Sovereign
Pontificate, and are ipso facto deposed from their
functions and dignities, and even driven out of the Church. It is
forbidded to them henceforward to consider themselves to be
Sovereign Pontiffs, and all proceedings and promotions made by
them are annulled. The Holy See is declared vacant and the
faithful are set free from their promise of obedience." This
grave sentence was greeted with joyful applause, the Te Deum was
sung, and a solemn procession was ordered next day, the feast of
Corpus Christi. All the members appended their signatures to the
decree of the council, and every one thought that the schism was
ended forever. On 15 June the cardinals met in the archiepiscopal
palace of Pisa to proceed with the election of a new pope. The
conclave lasted eleven days. Few obstacles intervened from outside
to cause delay. Within the council, it is said, there were
intrigues for the election of a French pope, but, through the
influence of the energetic and ingenious Cardinal Cossa, on 26
June, 1409, the votes were unanimously cast in the favour of
Cardinal Peter Philarghi, who took the name of Alexander V. His
election was expected and desired, as testified by universal joy.
The new pope announced his election to all the sovereigns of
Christendom, from whom he received expressions of lively sympathy
for himself and for the position of the Church. He presided over
the last four sessions of the council, confirmed all the
ordinances made by the cardinals after their refusal of obedience
to the antipopes, united the two sacred colleges, and subsequently
declared that he would work energetically for reform.

Judgment of the Council of Pisa

The right of the cardinals to convene
a general council to put an end to the schism seemed to themselves
indisputable. This was a consequence of the natural principle of
discovering within itself a means of safety: Salus populi
suprema lex esto, i.e., the chief interest is the safety of
the Church and the preservation of her indispensable unity. The
tergiversations and perjuries of the two pretenders seemed to
justify the united sacred colleges. "Never", said they,
"shall we succeed in ending the schism while these two
obstinate persons are at the head of the opposing parties. There
is no undisputed pope who can summon a general council. As the
pope is doubtful, the Holy See must be considered vacant. We have
therefore a lawful mandate to elect a pope who will be undisputed,
and to convoke the universal Church that her adhesion may
strengthen our decision". Famous universities urged and
upheld the cardinals in this conclusion. And yet, from the
theological and judicial point of view, their reasoning might seem
false, dangerous, and revolutionary. For if Gregory and Benedict
were doubtful, so were the cardinals whom they had created. If the
fountain of their authority was uncertain, so was their competence
to convoke the universal Church and to elect a pope. Plainly, this
is arguing in a circle. How then could Alexander V, elected by
them, have indisputable rights to the recognition of the whole of
Christendom? Further, it was to be feared that certain spirits
would make use of this temporary expedient to transform it into a
general rule, to proclaim the superiority of the sacred college
and of the council to the pope, and to legalize henceforth the
appeals to a future council, which had already commenced under
King Philip the Fair. The means used by the cardinals could not
succeed even temporarily. The position of the Church became still
more precarious; instead of two heads there were three wandering
popes, persecuted and exiled from their capitals. Yet, inasmuch as
Alexander was not elected in opposition to a generally recognized
pontiff, nor by schismatic methods, his position was better than
that of Clement VII and Benedict XIII, the popes of Avignon. An
almost general opinion asserts that both he and his successor,
John XXIII, were true popes. If the pontiffs of Avignon had a
colourable title in their own obedience, such a title can be made
out still more clearly for Alexander V in the eyes of the
universal Church. In fact the Pisan pope was acknowledged by the
majority of the Church, i.e. by France, England, Portugal,
Bohemia, Prussia, a few countries of Germany, Italy, and the
County Venaissin, while Naples, Poland, Bavaria, and part of
Germany continued to obey Gregory, and Spain and Scotland remained
subject to Benedict.

Theologians and canonists are severe
on the Council of Pisa. On the one hand, a violent partisan of
Benedict's, Boniface Ferrer, calls it "a conventicle of
demons". Theodore Urie, a supporter of Gregory, seems to
doubt whether they gathered at Pisa with the sentiments of Dathan
and Abiron or those of Moses. St. Antoninus, Cajetan,
Turrecremata, and Raynald openly call it a conventicle, or at any
rate cast doubt on its authority. On the other hand, the Gallican
school either approves of it or pleads extenuating circumstances.
Noël Alexander asserts that the council destroyed the schism
as far as it could. Bossuet says in his turn: "If the schism
that devastated the Church of God was not exterminated at Pisa, at
any rate it received there a mortal blow and the Council of
Constance consummated it." Protestants, faithful to the
consequences of their principles, applaud this council
unreservedly, for they see in it "the first step to the
deliverance of the world", and greet it as the dawn of the
Reformation (Gregorovius). Perhaps it is wise to say with
Bellarmine that this assembly is a general council which is
neither approved nor disapproved. On account of its illegalities
and inconsistencies it cannot be quoted as an ecumenical council.
And yet it would be unfair to brand it as a conventicle, to
compare it with the "robber council" of Ephesus, the
pseudo-council of Basle, or the Jansenist council of Pistoia. This
synod is not a pretentious, rebellious, and sacrilegious coterie.
The number of the fathers, their quality, authority, intelligence
and their zealous and generous intentions, the almost unanimous
accord with which they came to their decisions, the royal support
they met with, remove every suspicion of intrigue or cabal. It
resembles no other council, and has a place by itself in the
history of the Church, as unlawful in the manner in which it was
convoked, unpractical in its choice of means, not indisputable in
its results, and having no claim to represent the Universal
Church. It is the original source of all the
ecclesiastico-historical events that took place from 1409 to 1414,
and opens the way for the Council of Constance.